ImageImage

Grizzlies Trade Thread

Moderators: SD2042, VCfor3

Whole Truth
Analyst
Posts: 3,358
And1: 2,407
Joined: Mar 19, 2018

Re: Grizzlies Trade Thread 

Post#301 » by Whole Truth » Thu Oct 29, 2020 9:16 pm

I like the concept & frame work but Warrior fans weren't too thrilled with a similar trade suggestion on the trade board. Nor did they like PP's idea on the Jump of trading the #2 for Vucevic. I even included the GS 2024 & their fans didn't like it.

The TPE returned at a higher value was creative.

Can't see OKC trading SGA.

Like the idea of Bridges & the 3rd pick but is that fair value for moving up 1 spot ?.

Maybe target Turner in a 3 team deal to help trade in? (I'm not sure what Indy is looking for to suggest anything).
VCfor3
Forum Mod - Grizzlies
Forum Mod - Grizzlies
Posts: 3,983
And1: 2,015
Joined: May 11, 2017
 

Re: Grizzlies Trade Thread 

Post#302 » by VCfor3 » Thu Oct 29, 2020 9:43 pm

Whole Truth wrote:I like the concept & frame work but Warrior fans weren't too thrilled with a similar trade suggestion on the trade board. Nor did they like PP's idea on the Jump of trading the #2 for Vucevic. I even included the GS 2024 & their fans didn't like it.

The TPE returned at a higher value was creative.

Can't see OKC trading SGA.

Like the idea of Bridges & the 3rd pick but is that fair value for moving up 1 spot ?.

Maybe target Turner in a 3 team deal to help trade in? (I'm not sure what Indy is looking for to suggest anything).

Yeah some of those trades are much less likely than others. As for the Warriors trade, I agree that it would be a tough sell but getting the TPE and saving a sizeable amount of money (maybe 13m if I remember correctly due to not having to pay the #2 pick and saving salary immediately in the deal) is a huge boon for a team deep in the tax during a pandemic. It is the kind of deal that fans will absolutely hate because finances are one of the big benefits where as fans prefer trades that get them better players/tangible assets. I think it isn't unreasonable to change the deal to include both Winslow and Brooks but if we go that route I want to make sure we have additional deals potentially available so that we can end up with something better than Wiggins+2.
E S V L
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,915
And1: 529
Joined: Dec 19, 2017
Location: Toronto
     

Re: Grizzlies Trade Thread 

Post#303 » by E S V L » Fri Oct 30, 2020 2:38 am

VCfor3 wrote:#2 for Vuc also includes Wiggins who most would agree is a sizable negative on his contract. Getting off him may hold as much value as actually acquiring Vuc.


This makes total sense
E S V L
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,915
And1: 529
Joined: Dec 19, 2017
Location: Toronto
     

Re: Grizzlies Trade Thread 

Post#304 » by E S V L » Fri Oct 30, 2020 2:47 am

I’ll never accept Wiggins. I believe he’d ruin the team’s chemistry, hurt our core development and cap flexibility. No assets are worth this***: we’d loose more than we might gain.

Also, Miles Bridges is meh.

And SGA can’t shoot at the level to play alongside Ja.
Whole Truth
Analyst
Posts: 3,358
And1: 2,407
Joined: Mar 19, 2018

Re: Grizzlies Trade Thread 

Post#305 » by Whole Truth » Fri Oct 30, 2020 8:45 am

Find a 3rd team for Wiggins.

Knicks trade - (Randle, Payton, #%, FRP) for (Wiggins, #2)

GS trade - (Wiggins, #2) for (Jonas, Anderson, Payton, Knick FRP)

Memphis trade - (Jonas, Anderson) for (Randolph, #8)

or

Philly trade - (Harris, 2020 pick) for (Wiggins, Guduric) shaves a year off Harris, saves nearly 50m total

GS trade - (Wiggins, #2) for (Jonas, Anderson, Philly 2020)

Memphis trade - (Jonas, Anderson) for (Harris, #2)

On a side note, Minnesota could potentially have interest in Harris' fit as a small PF seeing they don't play 2 big men & need a PF ?. (Johnson, +?) for (Harris) Memphis break down the incoming salary over taking on Harris' contract..

Adjusting the second trade to include Minnesota


Philly trade - (Harris, 2020 pick) for (Wiggins, Okogie. Evans)

GS trade - (Wiggins, #2) for (Jonas, Anderson, Evans, Philly 2020)

Minnesota trade - (Johnson, Culver, Okogie, Speilman) for (Harris, GS 2024)

Memphis trade - (Jonas, Anderson, GS 2024) for (Johnson, Culver, #2)
VCfor3
Forum Mod - Grizzlies
Forum Mod - Grizzlies
Posts: 3,983
And1: 2,015
Joined: May 11, 2017
 

Re: Grizzlies Trade Thread 

Post#306 » by VCfor3 » Fri Oct 30, 2020 12:36 pm

E S V L wrote:I’ll never accept Wiggins. I believe he’d ruin the team’s chemistry, hurt our core development and cap flexibility. No assets are worth this***: we’d loose more than we might gain.

Also, Miles Bridges is meh.

And SGA can’t shoot at the level to play alongside Ja.


If we don't get off Wiggins in step 2, I'd target one of the trades in Step 3 that would allow us to do so. I'm with you that I'd work hard to not have him hurt our culture if we can. Ideally we are at #3 and Batum for JV+the other stuff and then do Option 4 and grab one of our previously discussed targets or Option 13 and grab Desmond Banes. Ideally we end up with a player at 8 who can fit our core moving forward plus get an extra pick for next draft (one Luka injury away from a lottery pick). Or we end up with a role player who fits next to Ja and two 1sts to use to trade up next draft for our start wing. In either path we clear a good chunk of money as well which is a small asset in itself.

Or we do the Bridges trade and then Option 6 with Detroit to dump Wiggins. 7+Bridges+Danny Green+expiring filler lets us take a flyer on an athletic wing who is friends with JJJ, take a good young player at 7, and probably flip Green at the deadline for a small asset to use in the next draft.

As for Bridges, yeah he is kinda meh but that is also why CHA moves up only one spot using him. He still is someone worth a flyer who may develop with better culture and players around him.
E S V L
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,915
And1: 529
Joined: Dec 19, 2017
Location: Toronto
     

Re: Grizzlies Trade Thread 

Post#307 » by E S V L » Fri Oct 30, 2020 1:39 pm

Guys,

1. I don’t believe Wiggins can be moved unless at the same crazy price like #2. I appreciate your creativity, but the reality is one that set the rules here.

2. What if we simply waive Wiggins like Waiters? Would it hurt us badly or we would be able to survive given our core players are on rookie contracts?

PS Charlotte won’t give up #3 for anyone but a star (Ja and JJJ in our case). They aren’t idiots. It applies to Detroit, too. I want me to be wrong badly, though :D
VCfor3
Forum Mod - Grizzlies
Forum Mod - Grizzlies
Posts: 3,983
And1: 2,015
Joined: May 11, 2017
 

Re: Grizzlies Trade Thread 

Post#308 » by VCfor3 » Fri Oct 30, 2020 5:12 pm

E S V L wrote:Guys,

1. I don’t believe Wiggins can be moved unless at the same crazy price like #2. I appreciate your creativity, but the reality is one that set the rules here.

2. What if we simply waive Wiggins like Waiters? Would it hurt us badly or we would be able to survive given our core players are on rookie contracts?

PS Charlotte won’t give up #3 for anyone but a star (Ja and JJJ in our case). They aren’t idiots. It applies to Detroit, too. I want me to be wrong badly, though :D


There are multiple reports that CHA has their sights set on Wiseman and think he could be a star for them. I think there is a real chance they make a move to guarantee that they get him.

As for moving Wiggins, I think there are teams that may be willing to take him on but they could just cut us out of the deal. Our only hope is to have players/a package that GSW likes more than whatever the other team could give so it turns into a three team deal more or less. There also seems to be a bit of a disconnect between how GSW views Wiggins vs reality of how bad his contract is so it may be hard to get the proper value out of a Wiggins deal to make it worth it.

And waiving Wiggins is a no go. It would kill our cap sheet and it would be better to be able to use a pick and move him if we need to later on when Ja and JJJ get extensions.
E S V L
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,915
And1: 529
Joined: Dec 19, 2017
Location: Toronto
     

Re: Grizzlies Trade Thread 

Post#309 » by E S V L » Fri Oct 30, 2020 6:04 pm

VCfor3 wrote:And waiving Wiggins is a no go. It would kill our cap sheet and it would be better to be able to use a pick and move him if we need to later on when Ja and JJJ get extensions.


1. How did Parsons’ contract kill us?

2. Given a limited impact Dieng made last year, it would be also fair to argue that his and Waiters’ contacts combined didn’t kill us either.

3. We certainly have a free max space for at least 2 following years, haven’t we?
VCfor3
Forum Mod - Grizzlies
Forum Mod - Grizzlies
Posts: 3,983
And1: 2,015
Joined: May 11, 2017
 

Re: Grizzlies Trade Thread 

Post#310 » by VCfor3 » Fri Oct 30, 2020 7:36 pm

E S V L wrote:
VCfor3 wrote:And waiving Wiggins is a no go. It would kill our cap sheet and it would be better to be able to use a pick and move him if we need to later on when Ja and JJJ get extensions.


1. How did Parsons’ contract kill us?

2. Given a limited impact Dieng made last year, it would be also fair to argue that his and Waiters’ contacts combined didn’t kill us either.

3. We certainly have a free max space for at least 2 following years, haven’t we?


1. We weren't able to go out and get an actually healthy quality starting SF when Memphis was trying to make its last couple runs with the Core 4.

2. We only had them for one year extra year and it wasn't at a time we were trying to use cap space/pay people so it didn't effect us much one way or another. Dieng is a decent backup C for what it is worth and will probably contribute some this season. He isn't someone I'd want to waive plus he can still be used in a potential deal if one was to present itself though I highly doubt that'll happen.

3. We could still have a max spot but then when Ja and JJJ both get extended we would have a large tax bill which is something Pera has never seemed to be okay with before. We probably would skimp on any depth around Ja/JJJ/max guy.
E S V L
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,915
And1: 529
Joined: Dec 19, 2017
Location: Toronto
     

Re: Grizzlies Trade Thread 

Post#311 » by E S V L » Sat Oct 31, 2020 4:48 am

VCfor3 wrote:
E S V L wrote:
VCfor3 wrote:And waiving Wiggins is a no go. It would kill our cap sheet and it would be better to be able to use a pick and move him if we need to later on when Ja and JJJ get extensions.


1. How did Parsons’ contract kill us?

2. Given a limited impact Dieng made last year, it would be also fair to argue that his and Waiters’ contacts combined didn’t kill us either.

3. We certainly have a free max space for at least 2 following years, haven’t we?


1. We weren't able to go out and get an actually healthy quality starting SF when Memphis was trying to make its last couple runs with the Core 4.

2. We only had them for one year extra year and it wasn't at a time we were trying to use cap space/pay people so it didn't effect us much one way or another. Dieng is a decent backup C for what it is worth and will probably contribute some this season. He isn't someone I'd want to waive plus he can still be used in a potential deal if one was to present itself though I highly doubt that'll happen.

3. We could still have a max spot but then when Ja and JJJ both get extended we would have a large tax bill which is something Pera has never seemed to be okay with before. We probably would skimp on any depth around Ja/JJJ/max guy.


1. Whereas now you are getting Vassel. Makes difference, huh?

2. See immediately above. We would have a decent wing (Vassel) on a rookie contract for 3 years - it is better than signing a moderate player on a max contract in 2021.

3. Ja and JJJ on max contracts + Clarke, 2021 rookie and Vassel on rookie contracts would already be a contender roster in 2 years from now. You wouldn’t need to go over the cap in the 3d year as you have claimed.
VCfor3
Forum Mod - Grizzlies
Forum Mod - Grizzlies
Posts: 3,983
And1: 2,015
Joined: May 11, 2017
 

Re: Grizzlies Trade Thread 

Post#312 » by VCfor3 » Sat Oct 31, 2020 11:41 am

E S V L wrote:
VCfor3 wrote:
E S V L wrote:
1. How did Parsons’ contract kill us?

2. Given a limited impact Dieng made last year, it would be also fair to argue that his and Waiters’ contacts combined didn’t kill us either.

3. We certainly have a free max space for at least 2 following years, haven’t we?


1. We weren't able to go out and get an actually healthy quality starting SF when Memphis was trying to make its last couple runs with the Core 4.

2. We only had them for one year extra year and it wasn't at a time we were trying to use cap space/pay people so it didn't effect us much one way or another. Dieng is a decent backup C for what it is worth and will probably contribute some this season. He isn't someone I'd want to waive plus he can still be used in a potential deal if one was to present itself though I highly doubt that'll happen.

3. We could still have a max spot but then when Ja and JJJ both get extended we would have a large tax bill which is something Pera has never seemed to be okay with before. We probably would skimp on any depth around Ja/JJJ/max guy.


1. Whereas now you are getting Vassel. Makes difference, huh?

2. See immediately above. We would have a decent wing (Vassel) on a rookie contract for 3 years - it is better than signing a moderate player on a max contract in 2021.

3. Ja and JJJ on max contracts + Clarke, 2021 rookie and Vassel on rookie contracts would already be a contender roster in 2 years from now. You wouldn’t need to go over the cap in the 3d year as you have claimed.


That puts all of your eggs in the basket of drafting a 3rd star in 2021. What if we end up with pick 14 and just get an ok starter or, if unlucky, a bust/mediocre bench player even if we move up? Ja and JJJ should be great, Clarke and Vassell could be solid role players, but I think we need that 3rd guy. If we aren't able to get that 3rd guy, we need to be able to sign or trade for someone who could be or at a minimum be able to sign quality depth so that our bench/depth can win us a game or two in the playoffs that may ultimately be the difference in a series.
E S V L
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,915
And1: 529
Joined: Dec 19, 2017
Location: Toronto
     

Re: Grizzlies Trade Thread 

Post#313 » by E S V L » Sat Oct 31, 2020 12:15 pm

VCfor3 wrote:
E S V L wrote:
VCfor3 wrote:
1. We weren't able to go out and get an actually healthy quality starting SF when Memphis was trying to make its last couple runs with the Core 4.

2. We only had them for one year extra year and it wasn't at a time we were trying to use cap space/pay people so it didn't effect us much one way or another. Dieng is a decent backup C for what it is worth and will probably contribute some this season. He isn't someone I'd want to waive plus he can still be used in a potential deal if one was to present itself though I highly doubt that'll happen.

3. We could still have a max spot but then when Ja and JJJ both get extended we would have a large tax bill which is something Pera has never seemed to be okay with before. We probably would skimp on any depth around Ja/JJJ/max guy.


1. Whereas now you are getting Vassel. Makes difference, huh?

2. See immediately above. We would have a decent wing (Vassel) on a rookie contract for 3 years - it is better than signing a moderate player on a max contract in 2021.

3. Ja and JJJ on max contracts + Clarke, 2021 rookie and Vassel on rookie contracts would already be a contender roster in 2 years from now. You wouldn’t need to go over the cap in the 3d year as you have claimed.


That puts all of your eggs in the basket of drafting a 3rd star in 2021. What if we end up with pick 14 and just get an ok starter or, if unlucky, a bust/mediocre bench player even if we move up? Ja and JJJ should be great, Clarke and Vassell could be solid role players, but I think we need that 3rd guy. If we aren't able to get that 3rd guy, we need to be able to sign or trade for someone who could be or at a minimum be able to sign quality depth so that our bench/depth can win us a game or two in the playoffs that may ultimately be the difference in a series.


1. 2021 is freakishly deep. You can find Clarke 2.0 even in a 2d round.

2. What max player are talking about with so much respect? I see none reasonably available.

3. Ja - Melton/rookie 2021 - Vassel - Clarke - JJJ in 2023 is gonna be a contender. I don’t share your sceptics.

4. Let me put it straight: you like #2 for Wiggins, but you don’t like the idea of then waiving him? If yes, it means you still wouldn’t be able to sign a max player because you have Wiggins. In that case, I don’t get your argument.
VCfor3
Forum Mod - Grizzlies
Forum Mod - Grizzlies
Posts: 3,983
And1: 2,015
Joined: May 11, 2017
 

Re: Grizzlies Trade Thread 

Post#314 » by VCfor3 » Sat Oct 31, 2020 1:38 pm

E S V L wrote:
VCfor3 wrote:
E S V L wrote:
1. Whereas now you are getting Vassel. Makes difference, huh?

2. See immediately above. We would have a decent wing (Vassel) on a rookie contract for 3 years - it is better than signing a moderate player on a max contract in 2021.

3. Ja and JJJ on max contracts + Clarke, 2021 rookie and Vassel on rookie contracts would already be a contender roster in 2 years from now. You wouldn’t need to go over the cap in the 3d year as you have claimed.


That puts all of your eggs in the basket of drafting a 3rd star in 2021. What if we end up with pick 14 and just get an ok starter or, if unlucky, a bust/mediocre bench player even if we move up? Ja and JJJ should be great, Clarke and Vassell could be solid role players, but I think we need that 3rd guy. If we aren't able to get that 3rd guy, we need to be able to sign or trade for someone who could be or at a minimum be able to sign quality depth so that our bench/depth can win us a game or two in the playoffs that may ultimately be the difference in a series.


1. 2021 is freakishly deep. You can find Clarke 2.0 even in a 2d round.

2. What max player are talking about with so much respect? I see none reasonably available.

3. Ja - Melton/rookie 2021 - Vassel - Clarke - JJJ in 2023 is gonna be a contender. I don’t share your sceptics.

4. Let me put it straight: you like #2 for Wiggins, but you don’t like the idea of then waiving him? If yes, it means you still wouldn’t be able to sign a max player because you have Wiggins. In that case, I don’t get your argument.


I'd rather still have Wiggins around and be able to move him for a useful player even at the expense of a 1st (just a lesser 1st than what #2 in this draft would be) than be stuck with his dead salary. Honestly I'd add a small amount of value (not a 1st) to swap Wiggins for Horford. His contract is less and he'd be useful to us as a good locker room guy and backup C who can start during the regular season if the opposing team has a bruising center we don't want JJJ to have to guard.

I think Beal will become available though not this year. Wiggins with one year less on his salary or Horford who would only have a partial guarantee the next year would provide a chunk of the salary filler and then you add in Clarke, 2021 rookie, or Vassell (Whichever looks good but not a future star) plus multiple picks to try and get him. Another potential target could be Zach Lavine depending on how the rookies pan out. He'd be able to provide that scoring punch next to Ja potentially though so could be a good option that doesn't take a ton of assets to acquire, but matching his salary with Wiggins/Horford as the filler would be important. Luke Kennard is a RFA that won't be a star but could potentially be a decent sniper next to Ja or a 6th man if our 2021 rookie and Vassell are working out. I like Duncan Robinson a lot more than you. If Giannis leaves the Bucks then Middleton is likely available. You would definitely want Wiggins salary for filler in such a deal but he could be a great guy to put at SF between Vassell and Clarke. The really long shot would be Booker asking out of PHX or Towns asking out of MIN. With either of those you'd want to be able to move Wiggins as salary filler.

So basically Beal or Middleton are the two I think you could maybe trade for if you haven't waived Wiggins.

And for #3 I think that if Melton is your SG with that lineup we are really good but not true contenders unless Ja and JJJ are both top 10 players in the league with one or both of Clarke and Vassell are Top 30-50.
E S V L
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,915
And1: 529
Joined: Dec 19, 2017
Location: Toronto
     

Re: Grizzlies Trade Thread 

Post#315 » by E S V L » Sat Oct 31, 2020 6:39 pm

1. Wiggins for Horford is approved on my end. Any idea what 76 fans may want us to add?

2. Beal is too expensive and old.

3. Lavine and Kennard? Give me a break. Each is just a slight upgrade over Brooks.

4. Ja, JJJ, Clarke, Vassel + 6 picks in 4 years - is a sustainable contender for 5 years to come.
VCfor3
Forum Mod - Grizzlies
Forum Mod - Grizzlies
Posts: 3,983
And1: 2,015
Joined: May 11, 2017
 

Re: Grizzlies Trade Thread 

Post#316 » by VCfor3 » Sun Nov 1, 2020 3:07 am

E S V L wrote:1. Wiggins for Horford is approved on my end. Any idea what 76 fans may want us to add?

2. Beal is too expensive and old.

3. Lavine and Kennard? Give me a break. Each is just a slight upgrade over Brooks.

4. Ja, JJJ, Clarke, Vassel + 6 picks in 4 years - is a sustainable contender for 5 years to come.


1. No idea what we need to add to get Horford. I'd fight hard to not give a 1st so Allen, Jontay Porter, 2nds would be on the table. If force I'd maybe be okay with like a fake 1st so they get to say they won. 2021 MEM 1st Top 20-22 protected that immediately becomes 2nds.

2. Beal is in his prime and should be a very good player the rest of this contract and most, if not all, of his next contract. I think he would fit our guys well as we try to contend.

3. Lavine may be an upgrade over whoever we have as our starter. He has the ability to score and the athleticism to be a competent defender if motivated to do so. We need another scoring punch that can create their own shot in our starting lineup. He would provide that assuming we miss on finding that in the draft. Lavine could be ok as the 3rd guy but he isn't cut out to be the top guy as clearly shown in Chicago. Kennard is simply a quality bench/depth piece. A luxury at best but a potential value piece in a future trade.

4. I think we need that 3rd guy still and then yes it would be a sustainable contender. Ideally we get that guy in the 2021 draft so that he is locked up long term and relatively cheap, but until we actually have him I'd want to keep open as many avenues to getting him as possible including either cap space or movable salary filler that isn't waived.
Whole Truth
Analyst
Posts: 3,358
And1: 2,407
Joined: Mar 19, 2018

Re: Grizzlies Trade Thread 

Post#317 » by Whole Truth » Sun Nov 1, 2020 9:21 am

Cutting through any trade suggestion & suggested draft prospect, to clearly state intent.

I'd have Memphis consolidating their Utah/GS FRP's to this & next draft in order to get their core group in place so they can start building ASAP.

As a non tax team, use this financial climate to build the pick asset base -

Both Dieng, Winslow are 32m expiring value, where I think OKC would offer pick value to get out from under taking on contracts for CP3 considering how hard their owner has been hit by this unexpected shut down, where before they probably don't consider it. Philly have the interest in CP3 & the unwanted contracts to match salary, where they'd have to give up value in the swap for the better player & fit. So I'd suggest Memphis jump in, take Horford for Dieng/Winslows expiring value & send the expiring package to OKC for pick assets.

Philly trade - (Horford, Richardson, 2020 #21, 2020 #25) for (CP3)

OKC trade - (CP3, Housoton 2024 FRP) for (Dieng, Winslow, Richardson, 2020 #21).

Memphis trade - (Dieng, Winslow) for (Horford, 2020 #25, Houston 2024)
E S V L
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,915
And1: 529
Joined: Dec 19, 2017
Location: Toronto
     

Re: Grizzlies Trade Thread 

Post#318 » by E S V L » Mon Nov 2, 2020 1:25 pm

1. Dieng and Winslow for Horford is awfully awful.

2. Lavine is a Gay 2.0 in a sense that he is a great player, but is useless for a contender due to his low IQ.

3. I can only confirm again that the plan to trade up on the 2021 draft is the only feasible option on the table.

4. Beal is a nice guy, but too overpriced. It’s like purchasing Porsche - it is a great deal for 50K but awful for 150K.
Whole Truth
Analyst
Posts: 3,358
And1: 2,407
Joined: Mar 19, 2018

Re: Grizzlies Trade Thread 

Post#319 » by Whole Truth » Mon Nov 2, 2020 3:12 pm

E S V L wrote:1. Dieng and Winslow for Horford is awfully awful.

2. Lavine is a Gay 2.0 in a sense that he is a great player, but is useless for a contender due to his low IQ.

3. I can only confirm again that the plan to trade up on the 2021 draft is the only feasible option on the table.

4. Beal is a nice guy, but too overpriced. It’s like purchasing Porsche - it is a great deal for 50K but awful for 150K.


It must be awful, you left out the main purpose of the trade, which isn't the player swap. The main value is the Philly 2020 20th pick & the Houston 2024 top 4 protected pick.

Horfords final year is partially guaranteed - (Only $14,500,000 is guaranteed in 2022/23. He would get $19,500,000 guaranteed if his team makes it to the NBA Finals in 2019/20, 2020/21 or 2021/22. His 2022/23 would be fully guaranteed if his team wins the NBA championship.)

So for the Houston 2024 top 4 & the Philly 20th pick in 2020, Memphis would be taking on roughly 25m considering the possibility they pick up Winslow's team option next season. The similar GS 2024 top 4 pick (with Houston also looking like a rebuilding team in 2024), cost Memphis 17m, that would mean the Philly pick is a rough cost of 8m, with Horford upgrading Dieng in the front court.

The deal is an expiring & Winslow 1yt (team option) for Horford 2yrs & partially guaranteed 3rd year for 2 firsts, one mid to late lotto, the other lightly protected.
E S V L
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,915
And1: 529
Joined: Dec 19, 2017
Location: Toronto
     

Re: Grizzlies Trade Thread 

Post#320 » by E S V L » Mon Nov 2, 2020 3:16 pm

Whole Truth wrote:
E S V L wrote:1. Dieng and Winslow for Horford is awfully awful.

2. Lavine is a Gay 2.0 in a sense that he is a great player, but is useless for a contender due to his low IQ.

3. I can only confirm again that the plan to trade up on the 2021 draft is the only feasible option on the table.

4. Beal is a nice guy, but too overpriced. It’s like purchasing Porsche - it is a great deal for 50K but awful for 150K.


It must be awful, you left out the main purpose of the trade, which isn't the player swap. The main value is the Philly 2020 20th pick & the Houston 2024 top 4 protected pick.

Horfords final year is partially guaranteed - (Only $14,500,000 is guaranteed in 2022/23. He would get $19,500,000 guaranteed if his team makes it to the NBA Finals in 2019/20, 2020/21 or 2021/22. His 2022/23 would be fully guaranteed if his team wins the NBA championship.)

So for the Houston 2024 top 4 & the Philly 20th pick in 2020, Memphis would be taking on roughly 25m considering the possibility they pick up Winslow's team option next season. The similar GS 2024 top 4 pick (with Houston also looking like a rebuilding team in 2024), cost Memphis 17m, that would mean the Philly pick is a rough cost of 8m, with Horford upgrading Dieng in the front court.

The deal is an expiring & Winslow 1yt (team option) for Horford 2yrs & partially guaranteed 3rd year for 2 firsts, one mid to late lotto, the other lightly protected.


It doesn't seem awful at all then. Not a bad idea.

Return to Memphis Grizzlies